Galileo Galilei

Traslated by Stillman Drake

Annotated And Condensed by S. E. Sciortino

Several years ago there was published in
Rome a salutary edict which, in order to obviaie the dangerous tendencies of our
present age, imposed a seasonable silence upon the Pythagorean opinion that the
earth moves There were those who impudently asserted that this decree had its
origin not injudicious inquire, but in passion none too well informed Complaints
were to be heard that advisers who were totally unskilled at astronomical
observations ought not to clip the wings of reflective intellects by means of
rash prohibitions.

Upon hearing such carping insolence, my eal could not be
contained Being thoroughly informed about that prudent determination, I decided
to appear openly in the theater of the world as a witness of the sober truth. I
was at that time in Rome; I was not only received by the most eminent prelates of
that Court, but had their applause; indeed this decree was not published without
some previous notice of it having been given to me. Therefore I propose in the present
work to show to foreign nations that as much is understood of this matter in
Italy, and pariicularly in Rome, as transalpine diligence can ever have imagined
Collecting all the reflections thai properly concern the Copernican system, I
shall make it known that everything was brought before the attention of the Roman
censorship, and that there proceed from this clime not only dogmas for the
welfare of the soul, but ingenious discoveries for the delight of the mind as
well.

To this end I have taken the Copernican side in the disco urse,
proceeding as with a pure mathematical hypothesis and striving by every artipee
to represent it as superior to supposing the earth motionlessnot, indeed absolutely,
but as against the arguments of some professed Peripatetics.
(note 1)These men
indeed deserve not even that name, for they do not walk about; they are
content to adore the shadows, philosophizing not with due circumspection but
merely from having memorized a fow ill-understood principles.

Three principal headings are treated First, I shall try to
show that all experiments practicable upon the earth are inszyfficient measures
for proving its mobility, since they are indiferently adaptable to an earth in
motion or at rest. I hope in so doing to reveal many observations unknown to the
ancients. Secondly, the celestial phenomena will be examined strengthening the
Copernican hypothesis until it might seem that this must triumph absolutely. Here new
reflections are adjoined which might be used in order to simplfy astronomy,
though not because of any necess ire importeded by nature. In the third
place, I shall propose an ingenious speculation. It happens that long ago I said
that the unsolved problem of the ocean tides might receive some light from
assuming the motion of the earth. This assertion of mine, passing by word
of mouth, found loving fathers who adopted it as a child of their own ingenuity.
Now, so that no stranger may ever a who, arming himself with our weapons,
shall charge us with
want of attention to such an important matter, I have thought it good to reveal those
probabilities which might render this plausible, given that the earth moves.

I hope that from these considerations the world will come to
know that if other nations have navigated more, we have not theorized less. It
is not from failing to take count of what others have thought that we have
yielded to asserting that the earth is motionless, and holding the contrary
to be a mere mathematical caprice, but (if for nothing else) for those reasons
that are supplied by piety, religion, the knowledge of
Divine Omnipotence, and a consciousness of the limitations of the human mind
I have thought it most appropriate to explain these concepts in the form of
dialogues, which, no! being restricted to the rigorous observance of mathematical
laws, make room also for digressions which are sometimes no less interesting than
the principal argument.

Many years ago I was often to be found in the marvelous city of Venice, in
discussions with Signore Giovanni Francesco Sagredo, a man of noble extraction
and trenchant wit. Prom Florence came Signore Filippo Salviati, the least of
whose glories were the eminence of his blbod and the magnfficence of his fortune.
His was a sublime intellect which fed no more hungrily upon any pleasure
than it did upon fine meditations. I often talked with these two of such matters
in the presence of a certain Peripatetic philosopher whose greatest obstacle in
apprehending the truth seemed to be the reputation he had acquired by his
interpretations of Aristotle.
(note 2)

Now, since bitter death has deprived Venice and Florence of those two great
luminaries in the very meridian of their years, I have resolved to make their
fame live on in these pages, so far as my poor abilities will permit, by
introducing them as interlocutors in the present argument. (Nor shall the good
Peripatetic lack a place; because of his excessive affection toward the
Commentaries of Simplicius,(note 3)I have thought fit to leave him under the name of
the author he so much revered, without mentioning his own) May it please those
two great souls, ever venerable to my heart, to accept this public monument of my
undying love. And may the memory of their eloquence assist me in delivering to
posterity the promised reflections.

It happened that several discussions had taken place casually at various times
among these gentlemen, and had rather whetted than satisfied their thirst for
learning. Hence very wisely they resolved to meet together on certain days during
which, setting aside all other business, they might apply themselves more
methodically to the contemplation ofthe wonders of God in the heavens and upon
the earth. They met in the palace of the illustrious Sagredo; and, after the
customary but brief exchange of compliments, Saiviati commenced as follows.

note 1 i.e. Aristoteleans: literally
"those who walk around." Aristotle used to walk about the Lyceum

note 2 Sagredo was, in fact, a close friend of Galileo,
and represents in the dialogue
the neutral position of an open-minded man of letters: Salviati is the man of
science, Galileo himself; the philosopher, who will be called Simplicio is a
fictitious, a straw man. steeped in Aristotelian philosophy.